…didn’t have the energy to finish that sentence, being without a government today and all, but makes good enough sense as it is. Maybe our local Republican friends can weigh in in the comments and clue the rest of us in on what your Party is thinking?
Here in the OC, many of our Republican friends are better than some of our Democratic acquaintances at fighting corporate welfare and other waste and corruption, defending open government, combating police brutality and the War on Drugs, and even protecting the environment.
But in Washington, in recent years and more and more, their Party has become something like a malignant tumor on the nation, which will eventually fall off on its own, but for everyone’s safety should be removed quicker than that.
I’m not so sure the GOP’s inevitable death is going to come quickly enough at this rate. So many wasted years since Boner took over the House, where we could have got the economy jump-started, gotten so many Americans back to work, passed immigration reform, addressed climate change, the list goes on and on…
But at least these government-hating government officials have managed to once again shut down the government, in order to, among other burning issues, deny Americans healthcare and keep CONTRACEPTIVES away from women. (Actually is this hara-kiri in the guise of self-defense? Maybe they realize that things will be even worse for them when Americans experience Obamacare, appreciate it like we do Social Security and Medicare, and begin to recall where it came from and who tried to kill it.)
A much-discussed Quinnipiac poll this morning shows that voters reject this GOP government shutdown 3-1 and aren’t falling for the laughable story that it’s the Democrats’ fault; this fuels a burgeoning preference for the blue party over the red in next year’s elections. Even all the gerrymandering that state GOP’s have done across the nation since 2010 won’t help this Party keep their majority in half of Congress. Or rocket Ted Cruz past Hillary into the White House in 2016.
As California goes, so goes the nation … and the Golden State has already tucked its own GOP down in the manner of a hidden, vestigial tail. Scott Lay identifies three vulnerable California Republican Congressmen who should be praying this is over soon, starting with the Inland Empire’s loathsome Gary Miller (dissed by little girls here), Modesto’s Jeff Denham, and Bakersfield’s David Valadao.
I understand you guys’ quandary:
Stop hating on latinos, embrace reasonable immigration reform … and you will lose all your racist and nativist voters (and members like Dana Rohrabacher) who will no longer see your Party as worth supporting and either stay home or make their own racist nativist party. And you’ll become even smaller of a minority.
Get over your obsession with contraceptives, Gaiety, and other good sexiness, stop making it harder and harder for poor women to get abortions when they need to … and you’ll lose a bunch of your “religious” base, who will either stay home or form their own Godly Party … and you’ll become even smaller of a minority.
It seems that President Obama’s fairly muscular foreign policy has robbed you of your status as the Warmongering Party; hence the entertaining and dizzying spectacle of you-all running around in circles on FOX News whenever it looks like there may be conflict.
I’ve always said, I don’t really want to be in a one-party country, like Mexico under the PRI, I don’t trust the Democrats THAT much! But what are we going to do? And what is our system going to look like in twenty years?
Damn – that’s right – I’m still registered Republican myself! (Long story short – I wanted to be able to vote against Romney twice.) I guess this is a good day to switch to independent.
Thoughts? Bueller?
It is a sad day, mostly, because we just could not work together to make a difference for the American people. As the U.S. loses its reserve status with another debt crisis looming, it appears to be another standoff or non event for the stock exchange.
Is a partial government shutdown necessary, or is this a great idea in order to pull back and restrain government spending?
Vern, my only other comment, as a conservative is that I love the green elephant.
When the Democrats get to be so “big tent” we have people like Jordan Brandman in the Party…I don’t trust all them either.
SNAP! From a fellow Dem…
I realize that the focus is on the blame game, but I think such is an exercise in futility. No, not because the Republicans are not responsible. They are. It is futile because it does not matter that they are.
Here’s my take on it. I did not want to post all that in a comment.
Nice stuff, Shripathi. I wrote my piece quickly to give us all a place to discuss this shutdown (AND the future of Republicans!)
having just gotten back from the turks (had to stash the money I made shorting united states government bonds) I really do not see the problem. the immigration people at the private terminal in houston were as nice as always and the sky marshal at john wayne was as gracious as always when he got my car from the valet. cutting all these entitlements and public services just might be what we need to thin the herd a little. maybe it is time for some social darwinism
But who will wash and wax your solid gold Hummer?
My Position on Obamacare: by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher
August 12, 2013 at 10:19pm
I am a co-sponsor of H.R. 2682, the Defund Obamacare Act of 2013. This bill, if enacted, would prevent any federal funds from being spent to implement Obamacare, and would rescind all funds previously appropriated for that purpose. Co-sponsorship of H.R. 2682 is consistent with my steadfast opposition to Obamacare, starting with my vote against its enactment, and continuing with my votes after Obamacare’s enactment for almost 40 different measures to repeal all or part of it.
Some have advocated that no continuing resolution to keep the federal government operating beyond September 30, 2013, be enacted unless H.R. 2682 is attached. I have not endorsed this high-risk strategy, which would have the effect of shutting down all parts of the federal government that are funded by year-to-year discretionary appropriations (which, ironically, does not include Obamacare), in the process making Republicans so unpopular that Democrats would win both Houses of Congress next year, and probably lock in Obamacare for the foreseeable future.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/dana-rohrabacher/my-position-on-obamacare/10153141675445422
… and YET, like every Congressional Republican but two, Dana voted for the shutdown.
Could DANA (OC’s longest-“serving” and looniest career politician) possibly have the excuse of being worried about a primary to the right? Hard to picture.
YOU believe that?
They both voted to fund the government. The House added a provision to hobble it and invite lawsuits to mandate already-mandated funding. Would your analysis be the same if the House had voted to fund the government with a rider calling for reinstating slavery? How about one for selling Alaska back to Russia?
You are one smart guy. I think you can understand it — and if you can’t I’m sure you can pose a searching question.
There may be layers of irony floating about in this exchange that not everyone is catching.
can we really bring back slavery, or at least get reparations for the money my pappy lost when they confiscated his property.
as for Alaska,,,we should keep it, I like the bears
Uhhhhmmmm — what would you pay me to lobby for reparations? I can use my finger puppets.
If you’d say yes to the need to negotiate with the House GOP if they demanded reintroduction of slavery as a price of agreeing to pass a new continuing budget resolution, then I have to admit that you do have the courage of your convictions. I thought you’d say “no” — as you should.
Greg, this little conversation got off on the wrong foot when you thought Ryan was describing what he thought was real, when he was just describing the failure of the Republicans’ attempted messaging. Every comment based on that misunderstanding has merely added to the confusion. No, Ryan would not negotiate on slavery.
Thanks for letting me know.
When Dana Rohrabacher becomes a relative voice of reason within your party, it is time to file for political bankruptcy.
So not yet, then.
I said “relative.” How many GOP Reps wouldn’t even utter the above quote?
This is part of the reason why Orange County is a cesspool of Bircher-lite politicians. The press fawns obsequiously on the slightest pulse of decency detected in wingnuts. Decades of insolence, ignorant remarks, bigotry is brushed over. “I have not endorsed this strategy” while voting to shutdown the government should be obvious.
Or do we now hand out bonus points for the thought that does not count?
Seriously, Rohrabacher and relative voice of reason do not go together.
For sure, the early August utterance is merely another example of Dana’s famous Tourette’s, and evidence that he still has half a brain ticking away in there between tequila blackouts; what counts is his vote which is no better than Louie Gohmert’s.
So, Vern….when you are you coming over to the independent ranks…?
Now-ish. Soon as I get my hands on a form.
Seems like the right thing for a writer, anyhow.
agreed!
Its actually pretty simple; the Republicans are terrified the ACA will work, and all their hysteria will be shown for what it is–a baseless manufactured crisis created simply to make a Democrat president look bad. By delaying it a year, they push it right up against the 2014 elections, so they don’t have to worry about running against their own failed campaign against health care.
Mmmm, yeah, except they haven’t delayed anything. Epic fail, on that score. The ACA is funded and interest in it today was so intense it caused the fed site to crash.
I happen to be self-employed and I briefly checked out the Covered California site today. For me to get an 80/20 or 90/10 plan, it wouldn’t really save me much money right now. But who knows…in a year the cost curve may have bent downward. I could, however, save some money by going to a plan with a higher deductible. And NOW, a fucking insurance company can’t deny me coverage because of any pre-existing condition.
Do you realize how empowering this will be for people who want to strike out on their own, be an entrepreneur, and not have to worry about losing their health insurance? I’m predicting the ACA will have a profound effect on the establishment and growth of small businesses.
You know what the catch is for that, don’t you?
They excluded dental insurance.
So there will still be an advantage to gaining insurance through work. Just much less of one.
Working for someone carries no guarantee of having dental insurance these days. But yes, some employers still offer it. The individual policy I have now doesn’t include dental, so going into the exchange wouldn’t be a sacrifice for me, as far as dental insurance goes.
Dental insurance nowadays = driving down to Tijuana.
From James Fallows of The Atlantic (hat tip to one of my other friends named Ryan):
Obama’s not going to budge so long as the GOP Reps end up looking worse and worse — something that will likely effect state legislative and executive elections as well. Royce, Rohrabacher, Issa, and all those who would follow Campbell are going to be absolutely miserable in a couple of weeks.
I have spent a day thinking “what the hell was Boehner thinking?” when he let 80 teabag nutcases overrule his leadership. The it occurred to me that these 80 nutcases who have 1 or 2 terms under their belt are actually getting played.
Think about this.
There are two major milestones when these yahoo’s could “shut down the government” to attempt to stop the ACA. The first was Oct 1, 2013. By forcing a government shutdown they would attempt to get Obama to do their bidding to avert “shooting the hostage.” The net result economically would be minimal, and after a few days when their “party” was getting bloodied and battered, the wiser heads would prevail and be able to send a clean continuing resolution (the Senate’s bill) to the floor for a vote. This will pass with an overwhelming vote from the Democrats and the sane GOP. Then all will be “back to normal.”
The next major point will be the debt ceiling vote. This is a major economic issue and if held up will have ripple effects on the global economy. Here even Wall Street doesn’t want the 80 crazies screwing around with hostage taking.
By giving the 80 crazies the chance to play their game now, and get their shorts handed to them, Boehmer has defanged them from being able to play the same stale card that they just lost on in two weeks. As Speaker and the leader of his party he can say “we did that two weeks ago. It failed. We won’t be doing it again.” and in doing so he will help avoid the possibility that “the good faith and credit” of the US will be put into jeopardy by the suicide caucus (the 80 crazy tea party morons elected from the Confederacy, and rural midwest, rural PN and rural CA)..This appears to be the difference between having 20 years experience (the Speaker) and having four (the 80 crazies).
Basically, by allowing the 80 members of the suicide caucus to do their crazy stunt now the Speaker avoids them doing it when it will really hurt the country (and the Wall Street patrons who he really answers to) and he gets to eliminate The Hasert Rule and get back to attempting to govern with the sane members of the GOP and the Democrats (the cross section which I call the Corporatist Party as they represent the Plutocracy that pays for their elections).
I may be wrong, but being stupid doesn’t get you to the Speakership of the House, and if I was pulling the political strings and finding some way to take the 80 crazies out of the picture for the next year leading up to the election, and wanting to get more mainline corporate GOP’rs elected, this is the route I would tell my clients to take.
So, is Boehmer crazy like the 80, or crazy like a fox?
Neither. Leading like that is just plain crazy. We’re talking about the freakin’ United States Government here!
Remember who Boehner works for. Wall Street.
If you start with the premise that he is doing the work of the Plutocracy (and he is), then you have to realize that what they feared was the debt ceiling, not “running the government”. It’s about the money, not funding the government.
Under that condition letting it come to a head NOW makes sense. In fact, it’s the only thing that makes sense. Otherwise we have to say that the GOP is willing to self-immolate and I don’t think that the party is willing to do that.
It’s been said that politics is like chess, you have to out think your opponent three, five, ten moves ahead.
The suicide caucus in nuts. But Boehner isn’t.
As I said, it’s a creative and interesting hypothesis. My only questions are as to whether it’s true — and whether, if true, the plan works!
This is wishful thinking, met00.
Boehner is not nuts, but that does not mean he will allow anyone to raise the debt ceiling without getting a major pound of flesh.
And should the Democrats not cave in more than they already have (Ryan budget is what they have agreed to already), he’ll let the ceiling not be raised and let mayhem rule.
Once Obama has been nullified, he’ll gladly introduce legislation to bail out Wall St. and the Democrats will go along with him to “help save the nation” from Obama’s dictatorial style of no compromise
He managed to do that in 2008 when he was not the Speaker. Today, it is way too easy.
I don’t know why you think this particular situation is being directed by Wall Street. Investors are extremely jittery, most experts were predicting the market could slide (it is) and many business leaders (including some on Wall Street) oppose the shutdown.
http://news.yahoo.com/gop-not-heeding-old-big-business-allies-070828233–finance.html
This does not disprove met00’s theory. In his estimation, Boehner works for Wall Street and is only temporarily humoring the crazies for the eventual embetterment of Wall Street. It doesn’t mean that every trader has to be clued in to every nuance.
Do I have that right, met00?
That may not be right, but it’s a pretty good theory.
What would lead me to believe in it is if Boehner gets them to pass the debt ceiling increase on the grounds that they are already “all in” based on the budget and their cards are already on the table.
Do I think that they’ll go along with him? Not really — so if so we won’t see that pass either unless he jettisons the Hastert Rule.
Do you think WHO will go along with him – the 80 dead-enders? Who cares?
Time will tell, very soon, if met00’s theory holds.
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/greg-sargent-governing-crisis-escalat
Hmmm, looks like I may be onto something. The next plays in the chess board are being made.
Greg,
I have been playing this game for far too long. People rise to positions of power by being better players who can play the bigger game, who can out think the competition.
For instance, take Solorio. He is attempting to “win” a Senate seat this time. He knows that he is going up against a very conservative member of the GOP. Now he can either say “I have the (D) vote, so now I’ll look a tad conservative on a few issues and try to peal off some (R)’s and DTS’s and make it on the margin. Or he can play to the other side of the field and be so different and make a case that his being different is better that he excites a base and then pulls over the DTS and R’s based on his passion.
Now a normal way to play this is to be conservative and play one in the hope that you can peal off a few and make it on the margins. That is what all the (D)’s do when they attempt to win in OC. This is playing the same old chess board in the same old way. Looking one move at a time (playing checkers with chess pieces).
Or… He can attack a weakness that they don’t perceive as one and come out strong on something that they see as their strength. He can play the game five moves ahead of where they are. Rather than promoting his candidacy he can promote a position and champion it from a different perspective than that which his opponents expect. Each piece he mails can be an attack on the “strength” of the GOP, but showing it as a weakness. He can associate his name to an idea, and that idea can then be sold rather than his name (chess – same board, different game).
Travis did that very effectively when he associated Edgar’s name to “Taxin Troy”. He made every issue about taxes. You had no idea where he actually stood, but he made sure you knew where Edgar stood on ONE issue; and issue that Travis no history or solid position on.
Wrapping this back to the current issue. Boehner is a very experienced pol. I don’t see him making the rookie mistakes that the Crazy 80 do. He is too beholding to the Plutocracy to let the Crazy 80 actually have the power to do damage to their income streams. So, letting the Crazy 80 of the suicide caucus do what they are doing now MUST be a ploy to defang them from being able to do real damage to the will of the Plutocracy. It only makes sense in the goal of a longer and larger chess game… something the Crazy 80 don’t play, or understand (they look at the board and still think it’s checkers).
[I know this response looks a bit “all over the place”, but when doing strategic analysis you tend to pull threads together that don’t appear to have common themes to discover and uncover the commonalities… sorry if flow of thinking analytic’s seems distracting to some.]
WAIT a second …. I couldn’t get past the sentence where you called Janet Nguyen a “very conservative member of the GOP.” Did I read that right, or does Jose have some opponent I don’t know about?
Janet, will have to sound “right” if not move “right”.
and yes, discussing Solorio’s strategy is off topic. 🙂
Yeah her anonymous lackies have been attacking all her critics as “union tools” – as though she hadn’t been the highest-profile Union-friendly Republican in the County for years!
One secret weapon that Jose has against Janet is his longtime friendship with Van Tran, which has always made a lot of us Democrats uncomfortable. But all the Little Saigon pols, who have long detested Janet, and are mostly known as “Trannies” or followers of Tran, will be quietly supporting Jose.
Hm… I shouldn’t hijack this thread in that direction any more, these will make other good stories.
If investors are very jittery, does the DJIA of the last two days reflect on that?
*Hey, Medicare will never work, Social Security will never work, the NTSB will never work: The list is truly endless. Face it – Government sucks the big one! What has the Government ever done for any of us? Well, they used to draft people into the Armed Forces, but decided in their wisdom to use a volunteer force. The Government causes endless wars, endless purchases of weapons of mass destruction, endless road trips by members of the government that never seem to resolve much of anything. The Government is supposed to protect our enviironment, but allows oligarchs that control energy and oil prices, allows indiscriminate fracking, sends our jobs overseas and allows workers from foreign countries to come in and take high dollar jobs with HI-B Visas. Government allowed International Banking to take over our countries economy and put profits off shore and untaxable. The Government has allowed unfettered immigration into this country without any reasonable restrictions. Government doesn’t make International Companies, Agri-Business and such be forced to label what they put in our food…..no GMO Labeling (what percentage of our food is that?). Yep, fire each and every member of Congress. Fire them all. We can do our own negotiations with Iran, North Korea, China, Russia and Afghanistan. Heck, those great minds in the Tea Party can do it all. They can all become TSA and Border Patrol Agents and replace those we already have. We can hire our own private Armies. We can hire our own private police, Sewer Workers and Fire Safety folks. Who needs Government anyway? We can buy our own drones to check out “iffy neighbors”…..what else can we do better than Government? Hey, we can even Tax our own neighborhood for the Community Watch Programs we can start like “The Zimmerman Patrol Watch”. Yep, lets fire all those folks in Washington, D.C. Especially, the idiots like Dana and Darrell who are so easily swayed that they vote to shut down the Government. They are both rich enough to staff their own Security Groups and move to Mexico. What a great egalitarian country! We really have the Equality and Fraternity stuff down to fine science don’t we? Thanks Tea Party Members…keep up the good work….we can all look back one day and say: “The Great Tea Party Movement of 2013 – killed the Republican Party until 2045!” What a job they are doing!
John Dean, the former Counsel to President Richard Nixon, said in a radio interview that he is embarrassed to be a Republican today. He mentioned the Koch brothers financing this group. I also heard two conservative scholars who wrote “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism”, Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, talking about what they consider the capture of the Republican Party by Tea Party radicals.
http://ianmasters.com/
I meant to say that the group financed by the Koch brothers is the Tea Party, not the GOP.
Vern, you have covered the local Tea Party, are they still relevant?
Was John Dean happy to be a Republican when Nixon was president? You know, this Nixon: http://thebea.st/1by97go
Or the one who used the Southern Strategy through Karl Rove’s mentor (http://bit.ly/1by9hVh) which is what gave birth to the Tea Party of 2010 and beyond?
Maybe he would be happy with this comment:
“I like to point out the most progressive president in U.S. history was Richard Nixon. Despite being a sleazeball, he enacted sweeping environmental laws, expanded social welfare programs, integrated public schools, ended the Vietnam war–you name it.”
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2011/09/the-los-angeles-times-reports-oc-supervisor-shawn-nelson-endorses-king-of-corporate-welfare-for-president/
*Pathetic….to be sure. Cruz needs a long vacation. Maybe to the Bahamas or the Caymans with some of the Koch Bros. money. Boehner needs to resign. Rand Paul needs to go underground as Paul Ryan has done. This is one of those very dangerous eras in American history……and they are too damn dumb to understand that. They all think it is still 2006 – before the crash! What did dad say: “They are living in a dream world!:
met00 was maybe on to something?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/boehner-reportedly-assures-republicans-that-debt-ceiling-will-be-raised
The lawmaker, who spoke on the condition of not being named, said Mr. Boehner indicated he would be willing to violate the so-called Hastert rule if necessary to pass a debt limit increase. The informal rule refers to a policy of not bringing to the floor any measure that does not have a majority of Republican votes.
Other Republicans also said Thursday that they got the sense that Mr. Boehner, who held two meetings Wednesday with groups of House moderates, would do whatever was necessary to ensure that the country did not default on its debt.
… or maybe not.
Vern, the big players are NOT at the table on the budget deal. The big players are the bankers and Wall Street. They can’t aford the Crazy 80 rocking their boat of money.
Now for the bad news.
Three times in that last two days the “Grand Bargain” trial balloon has been floated by either the White House or those in the GOP that want to wrap this up in a nice bow and finish it off.
“The Grand Bargain” is taking the suggestions from the Simpson-Bowels cat-food Commission and making them the law. This means means testing for social security, it means CPI for social security and cuts in medicare. In other words, the whole mess starts by saying the debt and the deficit matter more than anything else, and the best way to fix it is to start cutting at the “entitlements” that we all paid for already (which is why they are NOT entitlements). The commission recommendations get worse as they include more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and no relief for the working class.
If the WH is actually starting to suggest this (and it’s showing up in Politico seems to suggest that they are), that does NOT bode well for the social safety net, or for the working class now and into the future. It’s a sell out (It also happens to be what Obama wants, and has wanted for the last four years at least).
While I hope I am wrong, this does NOT look good for the working class and if you are under 50, it’s a VERY bad deal.
So, let me get this right…
It’s irresponsible not to negotiate with Iran…but it’s irresponsible to negotiate with ruling party in The House of Representatives. We somehow can’t afford to not listen to a nation that has been rattling a nuclear saber for years and calls the US “the great satin” but The great One can’t negotiate with the other side of the aisle?
So, let me get this right…
You’re drawing an equivalency between negotiating with a country over nuclear armaments and negotiating over an established, domestic law that the President has no interest in seeing repealed?
Not only has this law been negotiated and passed, but upheld by the Supreme Court as Constitutional.
Now the Republicans want to renegotiate after the fact.
The time for bickering over the health care bill has come and gone.
Follow the Constitution.
If you’re looking for a different outcome, elect some different officials.
Effin’ whiners.
Only you could.
All I am saying is, that one hand their is willing discussion, on the other there is not.
It seems the majority of people in this country are very confused about all of it, as are my own medical professionals I have seen in the last few weeks.
Right now my Dr’s are trying to figure it all out and still give quality care to their patients, which has become increasingly difficult and expensive. I truly don’t think the supporters of ACA wanted people to die because of poorly implemented regulations.
I hope that isn’t going to happen, but from what I heard today at my chemo-oncologists office, it’s having a dramatic effect on some patients ability to get the care need. They aren’t happy about it as professionals who really care about their patients.
Demagouge, you are correct, no disagreement.
However the SCOTUS ruling was a very narrow ruling, one that I disagree with, but it is what it is and I don’t get a choice in that.
I’m certainly not whining about it or the govt shut down, even I do think both are narrow and illogical.
The Republicans shut down the government because they they don’t like the bill that they negotiated for. The Democrats wanted single payer, and they compromised and settled for ACA.
If Boehner put a clean budget bill to a vote today it would pass, and the shut down would be over. Most Americans want ACA, and don’t want the shutdown.
You SHOULD be whining about the shutdown….it serves no purpose and is doing great harm to a lot of people. How would you like it if somebody pulled the plug on your income because they lost a vote. Spiteful bunch.
Next up….defaulting on the debt.
Effin’ whiners.
Not so, Ryan. Several Republicans were very involved in negotiations — and then voted against it anyway! Obama was bending over backwards and tying himself in knots to get at least one Republican vote.
“No one wanted single payer” is factually wrong.
You said “no one wanted single payer.” That’s wrong. The Progressive Caucus wanted it.
I didn’t say that the Democratic (Ryan, Ryan, Ryan…) Caucus was going to pass single payer. They didn’t have the votes — too many conservative Democrats.
I agree that it’s a compromise law — but many of the compromises were made to appeal to the tastes of Olympia Snowe and Charles Grassley, who happily facilitated the watering-down of the bill. Then they voted against it anyway. In retrospect, the Dems would have been better off if they had negotiated only within their caucus!
Pelosi and Reid couldn’t have made single-payer happen, even if they wanted it. Conservative Democrats would have never gone for it, and there goes the unity needed to make it happen.
I just have to quibble with “60 votes in the Senate.”
As I recall, that lasted a couple months – between Al Franken getting out of Minnesota recount limbo … until Ted Kennedy croaking and getting replaced with a Naked Guy Driving a Truck.
Each of your statements is wrong. Two of those 60 votes were Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson; two others were Max Baucus and Kent Conrad. Look for their quotes on single payer.
Reid might have had 50 votes, but the aroused aggrieved interests would be able to get rid of it after electing President Romney.
No one thought it had a chance of passing unless, at a minimum, the four names above changed their tune. Not 100% impossible, but 100% improbable. That’s not the same as “not wanting it.”
Having 60 votes to pass a bill is not the same as having 60 votes for single payer.
Let’s put this aside for now, though, and fry other fish. How ’bout them Angels?
Huh? I thought they were from Los Angeles!
YES. They very briefly had sixty votes. It was a miracle they were able to get it thru in that window. And it took SO much compromise.
And now I’m remembering Senator jay Rockefeller. He was the Senator most outspoken on how important the public option was. Then right when it seemed like there was a chance for it to pass, he MIRACULOUSLY changed his mind on it, defeating it by one vote. Glenn Greenwald was inspired to write one of his cynical defeatist pieces about how every senator is bought and paid for, and will never let real reform happen despite their rhetoric … and it was hard to disbelieve Glenn Greenwald that day.
Ryan, you need to read the Constitution, and pay attention to how bills are passed by our elected officials. If you don’t like the results, elect some new representatives that share your opinions, and pass your own bill.
This shut down is not the will of the people, it is being done by special interest groups, like the Tea Party.
Oh, and please continue to compare the ACA to slavery. It helps us understand who you are.
Do I have to be full-time lunch monitor here? Show me (Greg and Demagogue) where Ryan ever cheered the shutdown OR compared Obamacare to slavery.
And as far as single-payer having a snowball’s chance with Washington Democrats… i remember that well, having been a longtime single-payer advocate. We consoled ourselves that President Obama once said that if he were “starting from scratch” single-payer would make sense. For what that was fucking worth.
The very corporatist and conservative Senator Max Baucus was somehow put in charge of drafting the bill, which he did with an insurance lobbyist at his side. He took the opportunity to JAIL a few single-payer activists who tried to crash his meetings.
Single-payer backers – a minority, I think, of Congressional Dems, or maybe a slim majority – hung their hats on a “public option” – preferably a “ROBUST public option” which would, we told ourselves, lead inevitably to single-payer by giving stiff competition to the insurance profiteers.
Speaker Pelosi PROMISED there would be a robust public option in Obamacare, and I don’t know her to make promises she can’t keep … except for when she is woefully mistaken. She got no support from the White House. Chief of Staff Raul Emmanuel was especially hostile, but the buck stops with Obama.
Single-payer champion Anthony Weiner told us all that the robust public option would inevitably lead to single-payer. THIS caused that asshole Senator Joe Lieberman (formerly a Democrat but by then the one member of the Lieberman For Lieberman party, and hubby of Haddasah the insurance lobbyist) to switch from supporting the public option to NOT. No, seriously. He said something like, “If Anthony Weiner is for it, then I’m against it.”
I firmly believe that it was this kind of insane pettiness in Washington that drove Weiner to subject the entire nation to his Dick Pics from then on.
And I always called it Obamacare, even before Democrats gave in to the inevitable and started calling it that, because it had a lot in common with Obama:
It is/was some distance from the real progress that America needs and deserves, like Obama is/was.
But it was DEFINITELY progress from what came before, like Obama is/was. And deserved to be defended, as it was mostly being attacked for bogus reasons… like Obama.
And although the reactionaries thought they would add to its unpopularity by sticking what they considered an unpopular, black President’s name to it … I kind of always thought that he deserved credit for it for better or worse, and that if the law ended up popular as it might, he should share in that popularity.
A few years later, Obama and the Dems came to agree with me on all that.
“To be clear, one could say the exact same thing about slavery in 1861.”
Ryan Cantor
It’s up about ten comments.
Me: Carl, I want to burn down your house, okay?
Carl: No!
Me: Well how about only the second floor of you house?
Carl: No!
Me: Well how about your garage?
Carl: No!
Me: Well why don’t we negotiate what I can burn down?
Carl: No!
Me: YOU AREN’T WILLING TO NEGOTIATE!
Same thing that is happening in DC, But “Me” is the GOP.
This was already negotiated in the Senate. The Democrats there wanted full funding of the budget. The GOP wanted the Ryan plan. They agreed to maintain the sequester (which is a hell of a lot closer to the Ryan Plan than it is to Obama’s budget). Negotiation time is DONE!
Now, if you want to open up new negotiations on delaying the ACA for one year, Here are some Democratic terms:
1) The full Obama Budget
2) Full funding of SNAP
3) Raise the Federal Min Wage to $15/hr
4) Create a WPA/CCC to rebuild America’s infrastructure at 25% of the DOD budget for the next four years
5) Remove the cap on Social Security
6)
a) Return to the 1958 tax rates, adjusting the dollar values for inflation (and adjusting the personal exemptions for inflation, and maxing them at four per couple or head of household)
-or-
b) Return to the 1978 tax code, adjusting the dollar values for inflation (and adjusting the personal exemptions for inflation, and maxing them at four per couple or head of household)
-or-
c) Adjust the top tax rate (paid by the top 10%) up by 10% every year for the next four years, and eliminate the differential between Income and Capital Gains
7) Open Medicare for purchase at cost to every American (and business).
8) Eliminate Graham-Leach-Bailey
9) Create a new tax called the Federal Investment Trade Tax on all trades of securities or commodities of 5% of all trades over $100,000.
10) Fully fund a NASA program to create a manned lunar colony of 10,000 by 2025.
11) Fully fund a program to solar panel every Federal building by 1015
Now, if we get ALL of that we will delay the ACA for 12 months.
So, let’s start the negotiations from that starting point.
gee, that’s a realistic request…
Less realistic than getting rid of the hard-fought-for and life-saving Obamacare? In the same ballpark, I’d say…
What, you don’t want to negotiate?
STOP THE GOVERNMENT!
*In memory, have never seen so many people taking different drugs at the same time, thinking that no one see’s them! “Heck, they had the votes when they passed ACA!” “Heck, we fought them tooth and nail!”, “Heck, it was alright when I left!”, “Heck, we will do a Harry Carrey (or was that a Mary Carry?)…..before we vote for Obama Care!”
It is time for that Donald Trump moment: “Your fired!”……”Don’t even bother to clean out your desk…just leave slime!”
Great. Demagogue trashed all of Ryan’s comments, so half these conversations don’t make sense any more. Demagogue (who had an account as the Orange Juice Oracle) no longer has the power to do that. THAT was going way too far…
Ted Cruz is a whinner….of the inth degree! But because we are not name callers….
Cruz needs to move back to Canada! They already have National Heathcare there!
The boy looks alarmed. “A Canadian destroyed the world, Papa?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/opinion/sunday/dowd-welcome-to-ted-cruzs-thunderdome.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=general&src=me